[address-policy-wg] [Ticket#2012110601002595] Status of /24 PI IPv4 from last /8

On Wed, 7 Nov 2012, Gert Doering wrote:

> If everybody gets exhausted doing a new round of IPv4 PI policy every 
> time the "we do IPv4 PI only until <x> happens, and then no more!" mark 
> is reached, other policy proposals do not get the attention they 
> deserve.

I agree totally. This seems to happen all the time, people just want to 
solve the problems of today and care little about the longer term.

I'm exhausted by this, so I would like to see a policy that handles all of 
the space. Also, since people seem to be motivated to get IPv4 space and 
don't care about IPv6, let's just put a price on IPv4 which is now a 
scarce resource.

I would like RIPE to stop doing justification handling for IPv4. Just 
stop. It's wasted time for everybody. People have IPv4 addresses, they 
won't get substantially more, people will game the system to not have to 
return them. Let people trade them as they want, and new PI (/24) or PA 
(/22) space costs the equivalent per-IPv4 address cost as getting a new 
LIR, getting the /22, and paying the fees. This would mean a /24 PI out of 
the remaining pool costs 1/4 of the /22 LIR cost (which would mean what, 
around 750 EUR per year) ?

Just take the money, keep down on administration, and use the excess money 
to fund community development projects (R&D, FOSS etc).

> (By which I'd ask you to please stay away from a PI policy that will do 
> things like "but only in the first /9 of the last /8, not in the second 
> /9" - *iff* the community decides to bring back IPv4 PI, then let's do 
> it for good and for all the remaining space.  Doing it for "but not for 
> the last /x" is exactly what we have now - let's not do *that* again).

I totally agree.

-- 
Mikael Abrahamsson    email: swmike at swm.pp.se